People Attempting to Undermine Safe Sport

[La-LaPopRider]

@FitzE

I would never, even as an attorney myself, display such breathtaking arrogance as to tell a litigator and/or Evidence/Prof. Resp. professor that I would review their explanation and let them know what they did or didn’t get right.

Um… yeah. Those I plan to ask are not only licensed and bar certified since the early 70’s - in NY, NJ, DC and California, two are partners of one the most prestigious firms in the world.Not the country. The world. I think they’d know the answers to my inquiry. However, it IS a weekend…. And even if it weren’t, I’d likely just send them a copy of the screenshot post (and possibly your remarks) and ask a one line question via email, to avoid a very long back and forth which would certainly count as “billable hours,” - merely to prove my point here on Coth. Though, I said I would, so I will. That is, “review the statements made by Vx so & so,” and get back to that person with clear answers. It’s not up to me whether you or VX decides to believe the info I’ll provide. But, a good attorney would take any advice re “nuances of confidentiality,” provided to them by much more experienced attorneys and say “thank you for providing this information. I just learned something.”

I suppose you and VX are just too good for that? Or, perhaps, you assume you are the only bar certified attorneys reading this and/or commenting. Either way, it is your own arrogance - not mine- getting in the way of what would most definitely be a “higher learning,” experience for you both. Believe that.

[cutter99]

@La-LaPopRider

@FitzE

I would never, even as an attorney myself, display such breathtaking arrogance as to tell a litigator and/or Evidence/Prof. Resp. professor that I would review their explanation and let them know what they did or didn’t get right.

Um… yeah. Those I plan to ask are not only licensed and bar certified since the early 70’s - in NY, NJ, DC and California, two are partners of one the most prestigious firms in the world.Not the country. The world. I think they’d know the answers to my inquiry. However, it IS a weekend…. And even if it weren’t, I’d likely just send them a copy of the screenshot post (and possibly your remarks) and ask a one line question via email, to avoid a very long back and forth which would certainly count as “billable hours,” - merely to prove my point here on Coth. Though, I said I would, so I will. That is, “review the statements made by Vx so & so,” and get back to that person with clear answers. It’s not up to me whether you or VX decides to believe the info I’ll provide. But, a good attorney would take any advice re “nuances of confidentiality,” provided to them by much more experienced attorneys and say “thank you for providing this information. I just learned something.”

I suppose you and VX are just too good for that? Or, perhaps, you assume you are the only bar certified attorneys reading this and/or commenting. Either way, it is your own arrogance - not mine- getting in the way of what would most definitely be a “higher learning,” experience for you both. Believe that.

.

[La-LaPopRider]

@FitzE

The 90 million docs in our case went through 5 levels of review, anything questionable tagged for the litigation partners’ final review.

See, this must be the disconnect here. The lawyers to which I will be speaking, are the “litigation partners.” No offense, truly, but, when I need a question answered stat- (a legal question, especially) I go straight to the source. No need for 5 middlemen to “review it,” & provide me an answer I can retrieve in minutes from the expert attorney/s who (literally) decide these matters of law. Again, I will review it, I will get back to you. You’re welcome.

[La-LaPopRider]

@cutter99

.

QFP whatever helps you sleep better. I just “QFP’d,” your “period,” mark. Someone somewhere cares, I’m sure.

Does an alarm bell ring for you when I comment on any subject anywhere? You and MHM (usually, you if my memory serves correctly) show up within seconds of any post made by me, just to “QFP,” it. Do your eyes hurt from staring at your phone all day & night just to see if I’ve commented on COTH??? Must be nice to have so much free time on your hands.

Well, your going to have to pick up the pace. Tomorrow, I may comment on every OP thread I can find. Get comfy on a couch or something & wait patiently until I do (or don’t) decide to comment or reply. Serious question: are you building a DIY shrine dedicated to me? It’s just such bizarre behavior, is all. If you make a post, i likely wouldn’t notice for months & months. If at all. And, the only thing I would notice is a post you thought of on your own. You can see how 1000 QFP’s of my own posts would be seen as repetitive by me, right? (Rhetorical.) Ugh, god, find a life.

[FitzE]

No, please read slowly and for comprehension. I specifically wrote that I am not too good to defer to others. It is, in fact, what I do. That could not have been more clearly the entire point of my post.

Oh, and most of us at global top ten firms work weekends - and sit in offices where it hasn’t been the weekend for many hours now. There are other time zones, just FYI, and the market is rolling, not fixed to EST.

I won’t address anything else in your post including all the new info you provided about what you really meant upthread. You are not in a position to school anyone on anything, especially a profession you do not practice and in which you are not qualified.

Why would I argue fluid mechanics with an engineer when I have not studied it at all and have no relevant degree or experience? I wouldn’t. Because I have no problem whatsoever acknowledging what I don’t know, I defer to experts, and do not allow ignorance or arrogance to get in the way of accepting their expertise when given.

I’m thankful that people like vfx111 with such breadth and depth of knowledge and experience are willing to share it here. I would never address someone like that as you have and find it as rude as it is risible.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@La-LaPopRider

That went of the tracks for a second, but, I agree with your statement 100 %. SafeSport is not going to fight Howard Jacobs - not bc he is “the best,” (he is not) but, bc he represents the entirety of those who make up the USEF’s “VIP’s,” and their most special buddies.

To be honest, I doubt SafeSport cares much about who Jacobs is connected to, nor do I think they care much about USEF VPs. When it comes to the sexual abuse of athletes, USA Gymnastics is the elephant in the room. That’s the NGB SafeSport is more focused on… plus US Figure Skating, and perhaps USA Swimming. But Gymnastics is the biggest challenge of all amongst the NGBs. There are still serious liability concerns for the USOPC given what has gone on in that sport for YEARS, and how screwed up leadership at USA Gymnastics has been for far too long. Huge money. Plus, huge damage to the Olympic movement if more lawsuits happen. That sport is such a draw, so much advertising money involved… they want desperately to limit the scandal and legal/financial exposure related to the sexual abuse of so many young gymnasts, and the various people at the NGB who willfully turned a blind eye…

[FitzE]

No, they had the 5 middle men, not me. I was penultimate review. They were the experts. The ones you ask will have answers off the top of their heads for general questions about the rules of prvililege (just like vxf has already given you).

When these alleged global law firm partners you have on speed dial are actually DOING review for a case, they will have juniors and even contract attorneys doing first-, second-, third- etc. level review before it gets to their desk.

This is because no partner can look at 90 million documents themselves. They have trusted teams who do the initial reviews for them so they don’t have to comb through thousands of pages of non-relevant material.

Once the weed-out is done and initial review completed, THEN it gets to their level of review. That’s how it works in top ten global firms (or any decent sized shop, but I know you’re only impressed with tippy top elite status so we’ll stick with that). You’d know that if you worked at one.

If your experts have no one (“middlemen” as you call them) who reviews before they do, then they are (i) not at a big global firm; (ii) not working on large cases with huge amounts of responsive documents; and (iii) have almost no teams or are solo practitioners.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

Because I am a bit clueless and out of touch at times, and I admittedly haven’t followed much of any of the news related to the Michael Barisone case, nor the multiple threads on these forums related to that matter…

Is there something somehow tied to that case and SafeSport that underlies some of your comments on this thread @La-LaPopRider ? Because that’s the impression I am getting.

As far as debating certain aspects of the law, like privilege, with practicing litigators on a bulletin board? I’d advise against it. But I will admit… I’m not a lawyer.

[La-LaPopRider]

“I would never address someone like that as you have and find it as rude as it is risible.”

You literally called me “arrogant,” and here you sit claiming the “rude & risible,” ways in which you “would never,” address a person. Interesting.

Additionally, you should never assert or proclaim to know the personal (possibly, familial) surroundings of another poster. You claim to work for a “top 10 global firm.” Ok. I’ll bite, and rebut. Let me know when you’ve climbed the rungs of such a firm and the lobby placards read: “Partner,” next your name. If your ego has been bruised, I apologize. Doesn’t change the fact you have contradicted yourself in asserting you “posted clearly the point was, [sic] you didn’t not know everything,” while basically, asserting that you do know all you need to know & information coming from much more experienced attorneys are, by your standards, unwelcome. Which law school addition law book is yours, again? I want to he sure I read it.

Meanwhile, I suggest you read “The Tao Of Dal.” Not an attorney of course. Just a wildly successful hedge fund CEO. (Heard of Bridgewater?) I’ll skip to the point for you. Ray (Dalio- AKA “Dal,”) wrote a entire manifesto on this exact topic. That is, knowing when you don’t know what you don’t know.
While I’m certain you won’t even bother to Google it, I’ll help you out. (Paraphrased from Dal’s Tao.) “What should one do when building an empire? Locate the 10 minds 1000xs smarter than you in every category, to make the empire biggest and best.” Oh…… and, “have the wits to recognize when you’ve found the minds you seek & be humble in their presence, never arrogant. Arrogance will lose every time.”

[FitzE]

There are people on here who seem interested in discussing whatever angle it is you seem to be taking on the SS topic. Carry on with them because I truly do not have the patience for this kind of uninformed nonsense coupled with assertions of second-hand knowledge through alleged actual legal practitioners/family contacts - global leaders in the profession, no less. Spare me. Some of us are actually at those firms.

It’s not the weekend for me, but I won’t even use the old excuse that I’m too busy to bother with this. I’m actually not all that busy so far today and I’m sat here waiting for comments on an agreement. But, whether I was the busiest I’ve ever been or I was slow as molasses, I NEVER have time for amateur-hour babble like this. It’s great when people ask questions, when experts share expertise, when we talk about the nuances or precedents. But that’s not what this is and there is a consistent and insistent lack of respect shown by you for anyone else’s knowledge or experience, and that’s just a waste of everyone’s time and goodwill in these discussions.

As a legal professional I am respectful of other legal professionals of all types and all levels. I’m also secure enough in my own position in life that I don’t have to throw around allusions to access to top legal professionals or whatever access I can get through someone else to make me feel important. I am also secure in not knowing many areas of the law and relying on my fellow legal professionals to educate me on their area of expertise. That’s actually how the profession works.

[Midge]

I can either hear right from the expert or I can wait for the person who has to email the expert and report back.

[La-LaPopRider]

@FitzE

As a legal professional I am respectful of other legal professionals of all types and all levels. I’m also secure enough in my own position in life that I don’t have to throw around allusions to access to top legal professionals or whatever access I can get through someone else to make me feel important.

This is not to make you feel “important.” If you truly were “secure,” in own position, or “respectful,” of other “legal types at all levels,” you would be glad to receive the information which you clearly do not possess. I have no reason to offer such information aside from aiding others in their understanding. This is not all about you, or an attempt to besmirch your character or knowledge (at your respective level) here. Take the info with which I will provide you - or don’t. I would provide you the exact firm and precise partner therein, except, given yours and VX’s proposed “nuances of confidentiality,” I wouldn’t want to chance a confidentiality breach.

[FitzE]

Precisely. The alleged email to the alleged expert on top of it all. Lord, have mercy.

And that insistence that someone must be a partner or at a certain level of firm or ranking of law school or whatever elite marker that makes them deign to give credence to the advice. Pfffft.

Get back to me when you’re so much as a 1L let alone a first-year associate at any firm at all and I’ll get back to you with my credentials.

FWIW, I’m going with the ignore function on this one b/c from experience on here, this nonsense has no end point. Ever.

[Midge]

@FitzE

Precisely. The alleged email to the alleged expert on top of it all. Lord, have mercy.

Especially since we started with:

@La-LaPopRider

I’ll review it and let you know if you assertions are correct.

[La-LaPopRider]

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[La-LaPopRider]

@Midge

I can either hear right from the expert or I can wait for the person who has to email the expert and report back.

I mean, I could text. (Emailing isn’t a requirement.) I’m guessing text would be faster, or, equally as fast as you, yourself might take to “hear it right from the expert.” Does the “expert,” live with you? Is he or she present at this very moment? If not, I conclude it would take me just as little time to receive my answers as it would take you- and I’m not even an employee! Just out of curiosity, how many cases has your firm argued before SCOTUS? 1? None? I’m betting the latter. Otherwise, your firm of employment would have been interviewed by me before we chose, decidedly, on the firm most qualified to receive my retainer.

FTR-,not one of them are posting nonsense on a COTH thread. They have actual cases to litigate, and tomorrow being Monday, they have to attend this thing called…… “Court,” In any time zone in the US of A - these attorneys are either WORKING, or sleeping. I’d be severely annoyed to learn any 1 of my attorneys working on the same team as the oversight partner I’ve retained, were posting on a BB instead of tirelessly combing the details of the case/s for which I’ve retained them. That’s the thing about “professionalism.” Some have it. Some don’t.

[paw]

Where’s the ignore button?

And yes, I am a laywer (barred in CA).

[FitzE]

This is what I did: go to your icon, click your user name, choose preferences, chose users, then you can add a user name to your ignored list. I never did it before, and I’m pants at tech, but it was easy.

[MHM]

I just recently tried the ignore button for the first time, and so far, I like it.

I did find it a little ironic that you have to click on the setting that says normal on the person’s profile. If they were normal, they probably would not need to be set on ignore. Lol.

[FitzE]

First time for me, too. I chuckle because now I see a wee message that says: VIEW [X] HIDDEN REPLIES. Each time I see that, I hear Emily Blunt’s voice in my head saying, “No. I shan’t.”